Multi-Link Operation (MLO) with 5GHz and 6GHz performance – Real-world insights
Multi-Link Operation (MLO) with 5GHz and 6GHz performance – Real-world insights
The specification problems and updates explain why WiFi 8 emphasizes stability and some minor enhancements rather than a massive speed boost. Thankfully, that’s the case.
The possibilities for increasing speed beyond MLO seem limited. They’ve maximized channel widths in WiFi 7, leaving little room for further gains. This outcome might already be possible with WiFi 7 if the developers hadn’t made advanced features optional.
I've reviewed the testing methods used to assess the promised enhancements with MLO, but I can't confirm if these changes are effective in practice. The likelihood of mistakes is notable here. I’ve seen other reports online suggesting improved throughput with MLO, and I recently came across a relevant video where enabling it at 6:40 led to immediate performance gains. It’s interesting how little information exists about MLO and the actual implementation on devices. Thanks for your attention to this matter.
MLO seems like a joke. It either fails completely due to compatibility issues between vendors, or it doesn’t perform the capabilities tech writers and influencers promised it would. This article caught my attention—I noticed Intel’s Be200 actually handles things differently, not by merging links but by switching between them. For real speed gains, devices would need several radios, which most phones or laptops can’t handle because of battery life. Even if they could, power consumption would be a problem. The feature being discussed is STR-(E)ML MR, which stands for simultaneous transmit and receive enhance multi-link MULTI radio. Another frustration is the lack of clear information from vendors about their adapters, what features they actually support, or how interoperability works. It’s hard to find reliable details without buying the product first and then figuring things out yourself. Most Wi-Fi7 adapter sellers don’t engage with customers, and their sites use vague marketing language. Even top network brands like Arista must test everything themselves to understand device compatibility and real-world performance. At this point, Wi-Fi might be even more confusing than USB or HDMI in terms of features, support, and actual usability.
Technically they possess several radios since all devices with Wi-Fi 5 or higher must support both 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. Additionally, many of the new features in Wi-Fi 7 are labeled as optional. What’s the reason for that? I’m not sure. Another point to think about is whether Wi-Fi 7 is fully available yet. They’re likely following the same approach they took with Wi-Fi 4, releasing products based on anticipated standards. That’s why we once had "draft" versions. Being an early adopter comes with costs. If certain features expected for Wi-Fi 7 turn out better in Wi-Fi 8, it probably means they’ll refine them further.
The Intel Be200 features just one radio unit. This single device supports 2.4Ghz, 5Ghz, or 6Ghz channels individually, but not simultaneously — and it offers two spatial streams for each band. It can still run MLO, though not the version that was promoted during the original Wi-Fi 7 announcement. MLO refers to a broad category of technologies, and Intel’s approach doesn’t allow merging bandwidth across multiple links. This limitation stems from the need for at least two radios to achieve aggregation. The Qualcomm chip (QCNCM865) includes its own dual radios, while other manufacturers also provide multi-radio solutions, but not Intel. The reason these features aren’t mandatory is similar to how HDMI and USB standards evolved — driven more by cost reduction than strict consumer requirements. Additionally, the Wi-Fi 7 specification was finalized in January 2024, with the “draft” phase completed. Intel actually launched the Be200 before the official spec release (likely late 2023), and they were soon certified to meet those requirements.
In reality, this wasn't the case. It's another method by which vendors are being allowed to mislead consumers. What occurred in January was that the WiFi Alliance—an unofficial group of WiFi device manufacturers—began certifying their products as compatible with one another. Of course, this doesn't ensure compatibility with the final ratified WiFi 7 standard or devices from any vendor outside the Alliance. Essentially, it's a strategy to push hardware into the market early and secure a significant edge over smaller competitors. Admittedly, the slow pace of official ratification is somewhat unintelligent, but it does offer some advantages.
This IEEE standard appears to be developed collaboratively by multiple groups. The WiFi alliance acted quickly.